You Be The Judge: Anderson Vs Burk

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by afp1996

Your questions had nothing to do with the debate on whether or not the Jesus of the Bible is the same Jesus as AFP. You side tracked the debate with those questions. Then you balk when he doesn't give you the answers you think he should have?

Cracks me up.

He was in the affirmative Elder Burk was in the rebuttal are you confused?

[ChTatum]

Elder, please just call me Chuck.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by JN Anderson

There is no need to debate when there is no actual reply or even adherence to the debate rules and format. I will be glad to reply when TKB doesn't try to introduce Red Herring but actually debate the material already stated. Praxeas was clearly wanting me to simply with what TKB replied with. I saw no need or motivation to do so.

You know the above is in itself a red herring, you don't want to debate.

I have listened to Atheists, Rabbis, Creationists, and others refute less than what you both were supposed to do. First you said you had to travel and wouldn't be around to do the affirmation, then you said it wasn't top of your priority list, and then you backed out. Brother James Anderson, you didn't want to debate.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[JN Anderson]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

You know the above is in itself a red herring, you don't want to debate.

I have listened to Atheists, Rabbis, Creationists, and others refute less than what you both were supposed to do. First you said you had to travel and wouldn't be around to do the affirmation, then you said it wasn't top of your priority list, and then you backed out. Brother James Anderson, you didn't want to debate.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

I did not nor do I still want to debate someone who is not going to debate with me. TKB was introducing new material and not going with the format debate. I have no desire to go in circles or talk past one another. That is what I quit, I did not quit debating.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

Bro. Tatum that is a valid point. Thanks.

Luk 23:12

"And the same day Pilate and Herod were made friends together: for before they were at enmity between themselves."

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by JN Anderson

There is no need to debate when there is no actual reply or even adherence to the debate rules and format. I will be glad to reply when TKB doesn't try to introduce Red Herring but actually debate the material already stated. Praxeas was clearly wanting me to simply with what TKB replied with. I saw no need or motivation to do so.

I did reply to your material...

Originally Posted by TK Burk

Bro. Epley, this simply is not true. There were discussions by PM BEFORE we started. The subject we agreed to discuss is “The Christ in Apostolic Full Preterism.” Other than adding the word "Apostolic," he chose that himself. He also chose the word count. He asked me to debate him on his accusation that AFPs do not have the same Jesus as the Apostles. I have said this repeatedly. That is EXACTLY the “proposition” that was agreed on.

If you'll read my responses you'll see that I did answer issues he brought up. We first were limited to only 500 words, but Bro. Anderson's first post went over that, so he wanted 600 instead, to which I agreed. Then we went to 600 words with 15 allowed for anything that went over.

Bro. Anderson first alleged that AFP is based on the “allegorical type hermeneutics.” I answered that and showed him this was wrong.

Then he alleged that AFP “views the following Christo-centric events as past: 1. The Second Coming; 2. The resurrection of the dead; 3. Great White Throne judgment. This was fine, but – again – he was to show what the apostles’ taught about these and how AFP differed. This was NEVER done. I addressed this as well.

He then used John MacArthur and Spiros Zodhiates as his evidence for where he claimed we disagreed with the apostles. I answered that.

He then said something he pondered about the Book of Revelation, but provided no evidence for what the apostles’ taught about it. Consequently, I did not respond as I only had 600 words and reminded him of that.

He then said, “FP holds to the historicity and deity of Christ but obfuscate Christo-centric doctrines to the point that His coming is not sought nor His revelation of hope enjoyed. Clearly these Christocentric events have completely different meaning. This is a different Christ.” Sounds real interesting, but this is a statement that he based off, not what the apostles’ taught, but what he deduced from his sources, which are MacArthur and Zodhiates. Again, this was supposed to be about what the APOSTLES’ taught. But, again, I did answer what he said about these men and their anti-apostolic sediments.

He then went to the resurrection. But, again, I only had 600 words, and I used those up in responding to what he did ask, and also in trying to get him on the subject we agreed to discuss.

Then in his second response, he said he agreed with several points in my response. No reason to respond further to those.

He then used a quote from Hank Hannegraff to defend his afore usage of MacArthur and Zodhiates. Bro. Epley, this is supposed to be about what the Apostle’s taught. He – again – was using a known anti-apostolic teacher’s words to – again – prove his points. How am I to respond to that?? Again, this was to be about what the apostles taught. Since when are Hannegraff, MacArthur, or Zodhiates found among that list?

From that he went into his interview mode, and began asking one question after another. That is not what is to be done in a debate, which was pointed out by some others here….

My last post was 615 words. I began by saying, “Bro. Anderson, you’ve not proven any of your opinions are criterion used by the Apostles.” This was my way of trying to get him on track with the agreed subject. I then spent the remainder of my response demonstrating how HIS position is the one who actually differs, and in so doing, I responded to his ORIGINAL accusation that AFP teaches a different Jesus than did the apostles.

So, Bro. Epley, it is Bro. Anderson who did not debate the subject he agreed on. He argued what Hannegraff, MacArthur, or Zodhiates, believes, and then rapid fired me several questions, but he never explained what it is that he sees the apostles’ teaching, and how their beliefs differed from AFP. But, if you’ll read what I posted, you’ll see I tried to get him to talk about that very subject.

I hope everyone reading this remembers that Bro. Anderson said he did not quit, even though I quoted where he did in fact say he quit. I also hope you see that I did in fact answer many thing he did ask, as demonstrated in my above quote, even though he continues to argue that I did not. I also hope you remember that he is the one who said he would show what the apostles taught about Jesus and how AFP differed, and that is what we agreed to debate. I also hope that everyone remembers that I have asked repeatedly for anyone to please show in any of Bro. Anderson's posts where he did in fact explain what the apostles taught, and how AFP differs. To date, NO ONE has produced even one statement that he made that did that, even though that is exactly what he said he would do in this debate. I hope everyone remembers that I did adhere to every rule that was agreed upon before we started our debate, even though Bro. Anderson now accuses me of doing differently. And now the big one; I hope everyone sees that I have said in many different ways that I am more than willing to continue with our debate as agreed if he will actually debate what he said he would, therefore, it is not my reluctance to continue with this debate, but is instead Bro. Anderson's.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by JN Anderson

I did not nor do I still want to debate someone who is not going to debate with me.

Another Red Herring, you challenged the man to debate the Apostolic Preterist Jesus, and that is what was happening. You bailed. Plain and Simple.

Originally Posted by JN Anderson

TKB was introducing new material and not going with the format debate.

Oh like Communion? You have no shame.

Originally Posted by JN Anderson

I have no desire to go in circles or talk past one another. That is what I quit, I did not quit debating.

Brother James Anderson you did quit, that is why the thread was closed.
You said that you didn't want to debate.

Re start the debate, Praxeas said he would do it.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by TK Burk

I did reply to your material...

Sorry, my mistake. I should have said, "I did reply to MacArthur's, Zodhiates', and Hanegraaff's material.

[JN Anderson]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Luk 23:12

"And the same day Pilate and Herod were made friends together: for before they were at enmity between themselves."

You are good at twisting Scriptures there DDB.

[JN Anderson]

Originally Posted by TK Burk

Sorry, my mistake. I should have said, "I did reply to MacArthur's, Zodhiates', and Hanegraaff's material.

Citing a source actually supports one's argument TKB. I apologize that you do not agree with corroboration. I could quote, at length, other scholars as well. I simply liked theirs though. Ever get a hernia straining so hard?